9 What does this mean?Factors do not map to the cognitive/affective structure.Factors fit with other empathy researchProximity/ imagine self/ similarity clusterActive attunement/ imagine other/ nurturance clusterLogical that similarity and nurturance become salient when the ‘subject’ of empathy has an intellectual disabilityChallenge: how easy it is to actively attune

10 ConclusionsCognitive and affective processes are not the most salient featureInstead…Empathising with people with intellectual disabilities exacerbates particular processes used in empathising more generally:carers’ sense of themselves as psychologically similar, and willingness to be psychologically close, to people with an intellectual disability (proximity).carers’ active efforts to tune in to people with intellectual disabilities’ internal worlds (active attunement).Study gives evidence that carers’ mental representations of caregiving relate to their empathy towards service users.

11 Some limitations A self-report measureAccounts for 34% variance i.e. other unmeasured influences on empathy.Challenge items all negatively worded: did they cluster because of wording?Correlations are highly significant but weak i.e. small effects.Variance in Active Attunement scores could result from individual differences in tendency to respond in a socially desirable manner.25% response rate i.e. do findings generalise if very empathic carers participated?